Missouri had been impenetrable. Things change. This case finds that neither the GSE nor anyone else in the chain had the power to enforce the paper because they did not really have ownership of the loan, that their title was false, that quiet title is granted to plaintiffs, that foreclosure was wrongful, that compensatory damages are awarded and that punitive damages would be awarded. Total Judgment $3 million +.

Important takeaways —

The tide has turned. Courts are no longer looking the other way on intentionally sloppy foreclosures that cover up a larger fraud on investors. The courts are not clear on how that occurred, partially because nobody has been allowed to present it, but they have enough of a feel of the situation to see that there is something fundamentally wrong with the mortgage origination and foreclosure practices.

Quiet title can be awarded supported only by a finding that the mortgage is unenforceable. Whether this will stick on appeal is unknown. My view is that the mortgage stays although there is nobody (yet) claiming a genuine right to enforce it.

At this point, if the foreclosing parties don’t have it right, it is viewed as an intentional or grossly negligent act, giving rise to compensatory damages, attorney fees, costs, and punitive damages.

The value of a wrongful foreclosure case might be $3 million + which falls into line with other decisions.

Judges are getting angry over the fact that they accepted false representations in the past.

Judges are perceiving the difference between the debt and the paper that purports to describe the debt — i.e., the note and mortgage. While it is not expressed in so many words, this decision and others like it, sees the paper as largely fictitious even though there is a genuine debt out there. By implication, the courts are saying the debt has no paper that applies and that therefore nobody should be allowed to enforce the paper. It is close to declaring the mortgage void ab initio.

10 Responses

Q. And LPSD stands for lender processing services
desktop. Is that correct?
A You’re correct, now that you’ve refreshed my
memory.
Q And that is a system that is used by JPMorgan to
communicate with outside counsel. Correct?
A Yes. To my understanding, yes.

Judges do know what is going on and, very often, their hands are tied. There are many more people with a conscience than people without one. The only problem is that those without happen to have all the money too, which they didn’t get by playing by the rules… But to flat out declare that “all judges are crooks”, “all attorneys are incompetent” and “everyone is out to get me” as many keep claiming is increasingly more ridiculous.

I have said this before: the debt collection business whether it be for unsecured debut or secured debt is an illegal business model. They never have the appropriate documentation to prove the debt. Read the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.

The most important development in this case is the court’s treatment of the GSE, Freddie Mac. ie “quiet title”. Freddie Mac was silent while their contractor wells was doing their thing to the borrower and as such, sound reap the consequences of their inaction.

The “investor” who invested in this fatally flawed “GSE Business Model” –not innocent—also stood silently by hoping wells would escape liability when in fact , the investor and the GSE should have been bopped by the court just as wells was for their implicit condoning (deaf, dumb, blind) the errant behavior in this fatally flawed business model.

The business model and mission statement for the MERS best sums the factors the “paper” no longer exists. It simply says: “PROCESS LOANS, NOT PAPERWORK”.

I used to describe the MERS in comparison to the fake gambling parlor from the movie, “The Sting”. The MERS is more of the same; fake employees (hired as “SVP”s for the price -$25.00- of the rubber stamp that described them as such) hired to deceive hapless borrowers.

The grifters established a fake store front and then populated it with gamblers masquerading as employees; these are the subprime lenders.

Of course, someone had to control the “Sting”. Instead of Paul Newman and Robert Redford, the MERS employed corrupt bankers and equally corrupt lawyers.

As a matter of fact, these dual mechanisms are still in place and currently employed in deceiving the “patsy”: law enforcement. This is important, because, just like in the movie, the cops are made into fools even as they are employed to “police” the phony “crime scene”.

I used to sell a service wherein my family copied the “paper” to disc (“de-materialization”). We copied the notes and the liens using desk-top computer scanners. Once the mortgages were copied, we destroyed the paper.

We did so using shredders, burn barrels and the town dumpster. I have explained groundhogs once made a nest from a number of files that ended up under my front stoop.

The paper was destroyed. While it may have been done at the outset to relieve the burdens of storage and retrieval etc., it was destroyed nonetheless.

At this point, is there any doubt the grifters, employed to rubber-stamp any number of fraudulent behaviors, destroyed the paperwork for any number of reasons, not the least of which may best described as the on-going efforts employed to deceive law enforcement?